×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

expansion joint vs continuity slab

expansion joint vs continuity slab

expansion joint vs continuity slab

(OP)
My design for a 15m-28.8m-13m-28.8m-15m spans bridge was based on using RC precast girders for 15 and 13 m spans while prestressed precast Girders are used for the 28.8 span. I separated all spans with expansion joints. I think this is better to separate RC from prestressed girders due to different creep and shrinkage. Now the reviewer objects and ask me to redesign using continuity slab all over the bridge "jointless". How can i defend my theory and can you support me with a reference on the topic that can help me defend my design against the reviewer comments? Thanks!

RE: expansion joint vs continuity slab

I think that the case is lost anyway.
To design in current days simple supported spans is unacceptable.
There will be slight difference in the creep in between RC and prestress, but that's a small issue.
To have a bridge with a joint at every span it's a maintenance nightmare.
 

RE: expansion joint vs continuity slab

I agree with eliminating the deck joints due to future maintenance issues.  That's pretty much standard practice now where practable, as mentioned above.

If you're concerned with movement issues between your beam types, why not make all the spans prestressed??? What's the point of mixing your beam types?  

For a "jointless" bridge deck configuration I would still design the beams as simply supported for bending moment.  The deck would then be reinforced and designed for the negative moments at your piers.  
 

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources